Toolbox

Personal tools

Index talk:Writings by J.R.R. Tolkien

Eventually, I think we should remove the punctuation in the chronology. I've kept it for the moment, as many items still not have a page of their own (and then, as a suggestion, the info on which manuscripts by JRRT that are included should perhaps be in brackets). --Morgan 17:30, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

One more thing: I believe it would be useful to also have a page for a chronological list (although many are hard to date) of all manuscripts by JRRT relating to his legendarium. --Morgan 17:33, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I've been differentiating between periodicals and books by having the former without cursive. However, I'm starting to believe that it's better using cursive for both types, following the standard on TG. (People wanting to know if it's a periodical or book will just have to take a look at the specific article). --Morgan 20:22, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I think one cannot lump all publications for 1973 together, as is possible (and done) for any other year. This is because Tolkien died 2 September, so some of the publications for that year will be posthumous, some will not be. It won’t do to lump them all under posthumous, as was formerly done on this page, if only because a few signed copies of the 1974 Calendar are known (with provable authenticity). It is also not possible to lump them all under Lifetime, as the articles in the Sunday Telegraph and The Tablet (which I’ve added from tolkienbooks.net) are clearly obituaries or memorial pieces. So I’ve seen no other way than to split them up.

Amon Dîn2 #4 is from January (according to tolkienbooks.net);

The 1974 Calendar is known to have been signed by Tolkien in August;

Sotheby’s Auction was in July (according to tolkienbooks.net), so the catalogue predates that;

so these are all lifetime.

The Sunday Telegraph and Tablet articles are dated after Tolkien’s death, so they are posthumous.

Mythprint8 #3 is only dated ‘September’, so in all likelihood it is also posthumous.

The only work for which I can’t find any indication when in 1973 it was published is An Atlas of Fantasy, so, on greater probability I’ve put it under lifetime. — Mithrennaith 00:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

How exhaustive should this bibliography be? Looking at some other bibliographies, there are different standards being used. For example, TolkienBooks.net appears to list a publication if it contains a rare writing by Tolkien, even if it's not the first time it appears in print. But I'm thinking that it could be useful (for readers of the wiki seeking info) to include anthologies which include chapters from the more well-known of Tolkien's works. However, would this make the list to large? Any ideas? --Morgan 18:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

In case we decide to include such publications as noted above:

Over the Rainbow: Tales of Fantasy and Imagination. Includes "Riddles in the Dark".

I would include these, just as you include both The History of the Hobbit editions (single and split); you have Tolkien Compass on the list on the basis it includes "Nomenclature". --Mith(Talk/Contribs/Edits) 22:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, "just as" is a bit wrong. The History of the Hobbit single edition was only included as a separate entry since it contained a new appendix with formerly unpublished material. Tolkien Compass is included because it was the first time the "Nomenclature" appeared in print (although it was later reprinted, in a different version, in The LotR: A Reader's Companion).

But yes, I'm leaning towards including such anthologies with chapters from The Hobbit (and other easily accessible writings by JRRT) as well. I guess it's a question about how to best establish a good selection system, what's to be included or not. If we include anthologies with chapters from The Hobbit (and other easily accessible writings by JRRT), I guess we should limit those to English-language books (the current bibliography includes a few non-English publications, but only when it's the first time an edition or manuscript by JRRT was published there).

Another option is to draw a line between such The Hobbit-anthologies and publications which include more rare texts by Tolkien. But there aren't an awful lot of the former, I'd suspect, and it's subjective to define what's rare (unless we explicitly state in this index article that The Hobbit is not rare)! --Morgan 00:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)